Dads Against the Divorce Industry
DA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS.
DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes.
Cleaning Up After Radical Feminism: Gerald L. Rowles, Ph.D.
Manhood Is A Terrible
Thing To Waste
April 8, 2002
And ye shall tread down the wicked;In two previous companion pieces I've reviewed the social nihilism of radical feminism, and the niggerization of masculinity. As to the latter, there is no more effective term to capture the loathsome disvaluation directed at white heterosexual men. In a PC society that is convulsed by the N-word, there is no equivalent term that is prohibited the wicked misandrists in their fiery message of man-hatred. The only things missing are the sheets, pointy hats and nooses. And in the end, the man-hate propaganda message is nothing less than a smoke screen to conceal the naked extortion of power and wealth.
for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet
in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts. - Mal:4:3:
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children,
and the heart of the children to their fathers,
lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. - Mal:4:6:
In short, women have been sold a bill of goods, while men have just been sent the bill.
Men can no longer afford the Russell Yates defense; "I was at work while my wife was at home drowning my five kids." The pathology of Andrea Yates pales in the penumbra of feminihilism. Has there ever been a more candid revelation of shared pathology than radical feminism's pathetic defense of a mother who in their eyes merely employed post-birth abortion? Has there ever been a more powerful appeal for the protective role of fatherhood?
American kids, from conception to college, are drowning in a vat of infanticide, homosexualization, feminization, socialism, male-hate, drugs, imprisonment and fatherlessness. Single parenthood, the divorce industry, and a federal social-control behemoth are insidiously barring children from the protective arms of their fathers.
Consider just the latest extravagance from the "domestic relations" venue:
"Divorced parents (genera custodial mothers) anxious to shield their children from behavior they consider objectionable are asking lawyers to draft conduct codes to govern an ex-spouse's behavior during visitation, attorneys tell Lawyers Weekly USA Some restrictions ... limiting how long kids can play Nintendo and how often they'll eat at McDonald's - often represent merely a clash of values. And banning behaviors can raise constitutional issues and problems with enforcement, say lawyers."For the most part, "constitutional issues" present little encumbrance within the divorce venue. Few individuals have a greater apprehension of the inextricable link between cultural devolution and the threat to children than divorced dads. Consider the indictment offered by Michigan attorney, Mike Tindall:
"The (domestic law court) is out of control and ... it has turned into a system of private administrative law, not bounded by the constitutional restraints that are supposed to operate in courts of law. Currently, each county's (court) is operated like its own little kingdom, like renegades. They each create their own system and run it pretty much as they like. These systems have become very efficient little cash machines, generating profits rather than working for the best interests of children and their families. The way they do this is by ignoring the niceties of due process."As any divorced father and/or any of the 500,000 children in foster care can tell you, power taken by the State, such as parental rights, is rarely returned. It must be taken back.
Having said all the above, the point I am moving toward is a response to the hundreds of emails I have received since my column "Time to Yell Fire in The Theater" was published. The vast majority were of the "thanks, but" variety. The "but" was to pose the question, "O.K., so now what? What can men do to re-establish manhood and fatherhood?"
What follows is an attempt to answer that question, knowing full well that I may receive an avalanche of responses telling me why my answers are not sufficient. But we (Note: we includes men, second wives, and divorced men's mothers.) must grasp the simple truth that the surest method of sustaining defeat is to lapse into analysis paralysis and procrastination - or another variation of the Russell Yates defense; "The doctor didn't provide the right prescription."
Even after nearly ten years of up-close and hands-on daily immersion in this question, and countless hours of collegial discussions, I will not presume to suggest the definitive course of action. But what I can recommend is a combination of responses that will provide a likely path to success. Further, because I believe that manhood cannot prosper independent of the responsibilities and rewards of fatherhood, including the fierce protection of one's biological offspring, these responses will center on issues central to restoring that honorable role.
First, let me tell you what has not worked. I know this because I've talked to a representative number of fathers who have attempted it. Individual attempts to work within the family court system, involving the expenditure of anywhere from $1000 to $100,000 and subsequent bankruptcy or financial impoverishment, have proven almost universally futile. The courts revel in these individual cases because ultimately they can emasculate the "rich and powerful" father as easily as the poor and powerless ones. Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and L.A. billionaire Kirk Kerkorian are high profile, high dollar examples.
Second, attempts to get all "men's groups" to join together has not worked. Men tend to be territorial, and therein lays a clue to what is successful. In this same vein, the belief that men need to converge on Washington, or the need for a nationally coordinated effort is almost certainly doomed to failure. Groups that do get to Washington are often prone to corruption by the system. And the inherent difficulties in a creating a national effort from scratch are akin to, ibid; getting all of the men's groups to join together.
So now that some of the least likely options have been set aside, these are what seem most likely to be positive options.
As one of my correspondents aptly pointed out, the key is to build coalitions within each state that can then bring pressure to bear federally as a coalition of state lobbies. And the way to go about this coalition-building is to create public awareness - giving men permission to do the honorable thing they want to do (setting aside "getting laid" - one may hope.).
One of the problems with the Internet is that it is not reaching an important segment of the grass roots constituency.
Put Someone In Charge
Within almost every state in the union is an existing fatherhood representative or organization. Some are more desirable than others as a function of the criteria I have listed below. This is the stickiest part of the plan. No one, it seems, wants to relinquish their individual fiefdom in support of another. But this is essential. Without this component, you might as well stop reading right here and go "get laid", or pursue some other self-indulgence. Sooner or later, someone has to be allowed to take charge.
Any successful effort requires a CEO, whether its a Chief Executive Officer or a Chief Executive Organization. This is a full time, 80-100 hour per week job that requires coordination and focus. And aside from commitment, organization, and passion, it requires money. A single week of twenty 30-second spots on the radio will likely cost $500 - $1,500. A single billboard for a month will likely cost $1000 - $10,000. Guest speakers cannot be expected to travel and bring their message without some compensation for time and expense, and this will likely require $3,000 to $5,000 for a one or two day appearance, minimally.
Here are some criteria to help determine whom you will put in charge with your contributions and support:
Initiate Legal Action:
Your organization, the one you have chosen to support, must also be involved in reforming the engine of the divorce industry, the "family court" system - including FOC (Friend of the Court) or GAL (Guardian Ad Litem) and this must be done locally. This is why state-by-state representation is so important. As attorney Mike Tindall, conducting his battle in Michigan, has argued, "People often categorize any criticism of the FOC as just `deadbeat dads' who don't want to pay child support," he points out. "That has made the system almost immune from supervision. The truth is that this is a big money business they are operating and the way they run it is hurting children." Amen, Mike.
This second, parallel objective of the drive to reinstate manhood and fatherhood in the family and the culture must involve putting the judiciary and its kangaroo "administrative" law systems on notice. They must hear loudly and clearly that men are no longer going to stand idly by and watch the feminihilist pathology kidnap and drown their offspring in a vat of sexuality, socialism, and sensitivity.
Class action lawsuits brought on behalf of John Doe, or a singularly unique exemplar of the administrative abuse of due process, should be brought in every state with an unrelenting frequency and ferocity that demands change. Typically, such suits are brought not to necessarily argue the merits of the particulars in an individual case, but rather the constitutional and procedural merits of a broad range of similar cases. If you want to see a tsunami of change, watch what happens when class action suits similar to the individual one of Mike Tindall pop up in 20 states within the same year. Bang!
What earthly good is a man if he lacks the character and commitment of the heterosexual fatherhood role? Not every man must father a child, far from it. But men should share with those who are fathers the cultural values of fatherhood: leadership, protection, courage, commitment, and the responsible control of their paternity. Can we all not share and value the actions of those men who responded to our 911 tragedy? Their example and the essential father ethic include a commitment to sustaining and protecting life at any stage. The procreation of and temperate management of the upbringing of children is the most essential business of a society. It is neither a pastime nor an accident; it is the vital component of that society's survival. And without equivocation, the optimal environment for that effort is the two-parent, heterosexual, married nuclear family.
The foregoing recommendations are not the only avenues that may be explored, but if supported financially and demonstrably, they or similar efforts will effect an opening salvo that will put men and especially, men who are dads, back into the cultural equation. Most importantly, it will put their kids back in their lives and under their protection. At that point, we can all begin to arrest the dumbing down of education, the exponential growth of government, and other threats to the American culture and liberty.
Remember, manhood is a terrible thing to waste.
Back to DA*DI's Home